WBA again

Post Reply
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27513
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

WBA again

Post by stujones »

Its getting repetative I know, but how, just how is Miguel Cotto been promoted to being called a "Super" Champion at Light Middle?

There are 3 WBA Light Middle champions currently, Cotto, Trout and Mundane.
Quixall
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: WBA again

Post by Quixall »

stujones wrote:Its getting repetative I know, but how, just how is Miguel Cotto been promoted to being called a "Super" Champion at Light Middle?

There are 3 WBA Light Middle champions currently, Cotto, Trout and Mundane.
I think it's become about the names fighting each other these days, people are by-passing the title in their minds. At one time if fighters were going for world titles it was the main thing about the fight, but these days people have a lot of knowledge on fighters and it's become purely about that. As an example, if Price fought Fury, not a lot of people would see it as Price going for the British title, they would just see it as Price vs Fury and see the title as virtually meaningless. Whilst you have four or five governing bodies, each with their own different belts, titles become meaningless.
whiskey
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 11956
Joined: 27 Mar 2007, 14:52

Re: WBA again

Post by whiskey »

stujones wrote: and Mundane.
:D he certainly is.
JDC
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2963
Joined: 23 Jan 2008, 21:24

Re: WBA again

Post by JDC »

3 at Super Middle too I think
LeedsLad
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 996
Joined: 02 Jul 2010, 06:15

Re: WBA again

Post by LeedsLad »

It's three in most divisions.

I don't blame the WBA at all, it's a brilliant money making racket they've got going on - if you can get away with it, why not?

Until fighters turn round and refuse to pay the fees, it'll only go one way. But many of the fighters need a belt in some shape or form, however credible (or not) it is in order to sell tickets and earn a good purse, so it's a necessary evil from their point of view.

It's the likes of Pacquiao, Mayweather, Marquez, Cotto etc (basically all the big names) paying fees when their level of earning is pretty much guaranteed, plus or minus a bit depending on the opponent, which is odd in my opinion.
oliverfennell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5564
Joined: 15 Feb 2007, 06:37

Re: WBA again

Post by oliverfennell »

On another WBA note, and putting aside the super/interim madness (although it is related, but this is a ratings issue)...

On what grounds was James Toney approved for a shot at their interim cruiserweight belt. Not with hindsight given his performance, but due to him not having fought at cruiserweight in eight and a half years!

Not to mention his form - three years since his last win of substance and eight years since his last truly world class win.
josh fg
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3180
Joined: 07 Jul 2004, 20:30

Re: WBA again

Post by josh fg »

oliverfennell wrote:On another WBA note, and putting aside the super/interim madness (although it is related, but this is a ratings issue)...

On what grounds was James Toney approved for a shot at their interim cruiserweight belt. Not with hindsight given his performance, but due to him not having fought at cruiserweight in eight and a half years!

Not to mention his form - three years since his last win of substance and eight years since his last truly world class win.
Makes you feel bad for those guys at the weight plugging away to get their shot, the problem with this antiques roadshow of getting well established former greats to fight for everything is it shows no regard for the longeberty of the sport, for that they need to be giving exciting young up and coming fighters shots they have earned.
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27513
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Re: WBA again

Post by stujones »

JDC wrote:3 at Super Middle too I think
Just doing some "boxrecing" - and this situation is even worst than the Light Middleweight version.

We had Magee recently winning the WBA Interim title after Sartison received a serious injury and Andre Ward is classed as the Super World.

Well.... it seemed like the WBA stripped Sartison...... Magee full champion?????


No that would make too much sense.... so AFTER Magee wins the VACANT Interim WBA title, there is a VACANT "full" WBA title fight - between two fighters who have never fought for the world title. With Balzay winning some fight in Ukraine. Whats worst is that according to the fightnews version of the WBA rankings - Balzay wasn't in their top 15, his opponent was granted.

How wasn't Magee considered? Answers on a postcard.
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27513
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Re: WBA again

Post by stujones »

LeedsLad wrote:It's three in most divisions.

I don't blame the WBA at all, it's a brilliant money making racket they've got going on - if you can get away with it, why not?

Until fighters turn round and refuse to pay the fees, it'll only go one way. But many of the fighters need a belt in some shape or form, however credible (or not) it is in order to sell tickets and earn a good purse, so it's a necessary evil from their point of view.

It's the likes of Pacquiao, Mayweather, Marquez, Cotto etc (basically all the big names) paying fees when their level of earning is pretty much guaranteed, plus or minus a bit depending on the opponent, which is odd in my opinion.
It is - but in most cases the WBA "Super CHampion" has partially unified the belt at one stage - Cotto aint.
Tykemania
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 540
Joined: 15 Nov 2007, 20:22

Re: WBA again

Post by Tykemania »

Quixall wrote:
stujones wrote:I think it's become about the names fighting each other these days, people are by-passing the title in their minds. At one time if fighters were going for world titles it was the main thing about the fight, but these days people have a lot of knowledge on fighters and it's become purely about that. As an example, if Price fought Fury, not a lot of people would see it as Price going for the British title, they would just see it as Price vs Fury and see the title as virtually meaningless. Whilst you have four or five governing bodies, each with their own different belts, titles become meaningless.
Oddly, the Lonsdale belt is one of the few which have held its cachet!
Jeff Thomas
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3016
Joined: 30 Apr 2009, 06:32

Re: WBA again

Post by Jeff Thomas »

What is a world champion? These days it mean nothing.
CharlieW
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 27
Joined: 17 Dec 2011, 21:09

Re: WBA again

Post by CharlieW »

Boxing is getting harder and harder to promote and without all these belts we wouldn't see half the fights we do. I do agree that surely there should be one world champion and they are the best in that division but i believe to keep boxing as a major sport alot of these big fights have to have a belt backing them to sell tickets and mainly to get TV involved.

Boxing is a big Business !!
milpool
Cruiserweight
Posts: 5402
Joined: 18 May 2011, 13:38

Re: WBA again

Post by milpool »

If the WBA are making so much in sanctioning fees I'm presuming that they are pouring lots of it back into the sport to help create the legends of the future and generally make the sport of boxing a better spectacle for all?

I didn't think so...
Dbear
Cruiserweight
Posts: 26
Joined: 31 Oct 2010, 12:29

Re: WBA again

Post by Dbear »

It's the same in the middleweight division too, strum is super champ even though he has never unified, golovkin is regular champ and n'jikam or whatever his name is is interim champ! Madness
Post Reply